Without seeing the config pages, I couldn’t tell you. From the description on Amazon it looks like the Vonets acts as in Bridge mode only. The TP-LINK can act as AP, Router, Repeater, Bridge or Client so is fully flexible.

You really only require Bridge mode to connect RISCOS up, so either would do the same job. You’re choice is probably down to aesthetics and design. I chose the TP-LINK because it’s square, flat on both sides (so could be sticky-padded to the Pi case) and is exactly the same size as the width of the Pi/Pi2. Height wise, it’s about 15mm.

Hi…I don’t understand how “ARMv7 fast mode” can make software run faster – that’s the implication of the wording. If I understand correctly, what it’s actually doing is just causing less Aborts to be generated from alignment exceptions (of which there shouldn’t be any anyway) – but from the wording on “ARMv7 strict mode” the Abort handler doesn’t actually fixup alignment exceptions. Based on this, what is the difference between the two?

ARMv7 fast mode: Unaligned accesses will be handled “correctly”, i.e. for an unaligned LDR it will load 4 consecutive bytes from the indicated address (this is different from the “rotated load” behaviour used by ARMv5 and below). I think the “fast” description comes from the fact that (compared to the other modes) this is the fastest way for a program to perform an unaligned access, because it’s handled automatically by the CPU (if the CPU was in any of the other modes then performing an unaligned access would require extra effort by the program)

ARMv7 strict mode: Unaligned/rotated accesses will generate an alignment exception. You’re right about there being no abort handler to fix up the accesses, so for this situation the program will just abort.